Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
OK a debate in another thread got me thinking. What are the requirements for a city to be called a "major" city on a national level?
Here are the criteria I've always used. A city needs to meet all of these in order to be called "major" in my book.
Presence of a major league sports franchise
Large airport (with more than 5 million passengers per year, and being called "international" doesn't necessarily make an airport large)
Presence of at least one major research university
At least 5 skyscrapers of 300 feet
At least 1 major corporate headquarters
Must have at least two interstates intersect in the city
Did I leave anything out? Or am I being too restrictive?
I realize some people in this forum will be offended that I don't consider their beloved cities to be "major." But there's no shame in being a really cool non-major national city. I just think some people are a little too cavalier with their definitions of "major city" and maybe also a little too sensitive.
I think some of these things are more like inevitable consequences of being a major city (5 buildings over 300 ft. or having a major sports team) than requirements for being one, per se.
In my opinion, a city is a "major city" if it has:
-The presence of big industry (yes, often seen in the form of skyscrapers)
-An International Airport
-A metro population of around 1 million people or more
And...that's it. I think the classification of major cities is otherwise very versatile.
For example, a lot of people consider Austin, Portland, and Las Vegas major cities. However - none of the three have big name pro sports teams. Portland doesn't have a major research university. Las Vegas doesn't have any real skyscrapers. And I'm pretty sure Austin doesn't get 5 million people a year in airport traffic.
However, all three still have: strong, independent local economies; metro populations of close to or over 2 million; and great name recognition and attention within society. I think that makes them worthy of being called major cities.
(Note: I'm not trying to single anyone out here. I just wanted to make the point that I don't think super-specific criteria can apply to every case.)
I say, a major city is one that is about 300 square miles big with say,
8 million people within those limits.
two major airports,
6 or so professional sports teams.
3 or 4 major research universities,
a major financial district.
endless highrises in 3 or 4 centers,
unique culture,
major entertainment hub that hosts lots of television and radio shows,
has major national newspapers in circulation,
lots and lots and lots of ethnic food,
extremely diverse population,
has a very established history,
is world known for more then 5 or 6 or 7 or 8 or 9 or 10 reasons,
lots of fashion,
world class events take place often....
if a city falls short of these criteria, it's not a major city, but rather, a large one, if even that!
In the U.S., I'd say that a "major city" has a metropolitan area population of more than 2 million. That would include Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Dallas/Fort Worth, Denver, Detroit, Houston, Los Angeles, Miami, Minneapolis/St. Paul, New York City, Orlando, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, Portland, Sacramento, St. Louis, San Fransisco/Oakland/San Jose, Seattle, Tampa/St. Petersburg, and Washington D.C. The only one I might argue doesn't belong there is Sacramento.
A population of between 1.5-2 million would probably put a city on the fringe. These cities would include Austin, Charlotte, Columbus, Indianapolis, Kansas City, Las Vegas, Milwaukee, Nashville, Providence, San Antonio, and Virginia Beach/Norfolk. I'm not sure about Providence on this list. A few other slightly smaller cities, such as Buffalo, New Orleans, Memphis, and Oklahoma City might also qualify.
In my opinion, a city is a "major city" if it has:
-The presence of big industry (yes, often seen in the form of skyscrapers)
-An International Airport
-A metro population of around 1 million people or more
And...that's it. I think the classification of major cities is otherwise very versatile.
For example, a lot of people consider Austin, Portland, and Las Vegas major cities. However - none of the three have big name pro sports teams. Portland doesn't have a major research university. Las Vegas doesn't have any real skyscrapers. And I'm pretty sure Austin doesn't get 5 million people a year in airport traffic.
However, all three still have: strong, independent local economies; metro populations of close to or over 2 million; and great name recognition and attention within society. I think that makes them worthy of being called major cities.
(Note: I'm not trying to single anyone out here. I just wanted to make the point that I don't think super-specific criteria can apply to every case.)
Good point about Las Vegas. I would still consider Las Vegas to be a major city even though it doesn't have a professional sports team because of its special circumstances; its gambling situation makes it extremely difficult to land a professional sports team.
I honestly wouldn't consider Austin to be a major city. A very strong regional powerhouse and a great place to live, yes, but not a major city on a national scale. Then again, Austin has been mentioned in various circles as being a prime market for a professional sports team relocation so maybe I should reconsider.
OK a debate in another thread got me thinking. What are the requirements for a city to be called a "major" city on a national level?
Here are the criteria I've always used. A city needs to meet all of these in order to be called "major" in my book.
Presence of a major league sports franchise
Large airport (with more than 5 million passengers per year, and being called "international" doesn't necessarily make an airport large)
Presence of at least one major research university
At least 5 skyscrapers of 300 feet
At least 1 major corporate headquarters
Must have at least two interstates intersect in the city
Did I leave anything out? Or am I being too restrictive?
I realize some people in this forum will be offended that I don't consider their beloved cities to be "major." But there's no shame in being a really cool non-major national city. I just think some people are a little too cavalier with their definitions of "major city" and maybe also a little too sensitive.
Well, except for the last 5 criteria, Green Bay, WI nails it!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
